usa, legal, real-estate, discriminationI just passed my Texas Real Estate exams today (did it on the first time). I’m wanting to know to what extent is it legal to “come out” as a non-Christian company in a regulated industry that would prohibit religious discrimination.
No person in the United States shall on the grounds of race, color, national origin, religion, or sex be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity funded in whole or in part with funds made available under this subchapter.
803(b)(c) To make, print, or publish, or cause to be made, printed, or published any notice, statement, or advertisement, with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling that indicates any preference, limitation, or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin, or an intention to make any such preference, limitation, or discrimination.
…
805(a) In General.–It shall be unlawful for any person or other entity whose business includes engaging in residential real estate-related transactions to discriminate against any person in making available such a transaction, or in the terms or conditions of such a transaction, because of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin.
Sub N. PROHIBITED PRACTICES AND DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS
1101.651(b)(32) discriminates against an owner, potential buyer, landlord, or potential tenant on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, national origin, or ancestry, including directing a prospective buyer or tenant interested in equivalent properties to a different area based on the race, color, religion, sex, disability familial status, national origin, o
Oh and it get’s better, if I wanted to get a DBA as “Reasonable Atheist Non-Believer Realty” I could furthermore force Christian cartels to list me?
Sec. 806.[42 U.S.C. 3606] Discrimination in provision of brokerage services
After December 31, 1968, it shall be unlawful to deny any person access to or membership or participation in any multiple-listing service, real estate brokers’ organization or other service, organization, or facility relating to the business of selling or renting dwellings, or to discriminate against him in the terms or conditions of such access, membership, or participation, on account of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin.
Is there a court case that states how anti-theist you can be, before you’re religiously discriminating? Is advertising that you’re an Atheist? Or, moreover that you’re a non-Christian, non-Muslim, non-theist organization discriminating? Can you make a statement about superstition regardless of religion, and not be discriminating? Any precedents on this matter would greatly be appreciated.
Although religious persecution is not quite on par with racial or sex discrimination in certain terms, it is as foundational to our law if not more so. To answer your question, which seems like a semantic question about how far anti-theism can be taken before it becomes discrimination, here is Bob Jones University v. U. S. (1982) (Oyez abstract). The concurrence is that discrimination is one exercise of free speech / religion that may be burdened by the state. In other more practical words, your anti-theism can be restricted if it crosses over into prohibitory hiring or servicing practices, and likely if you show a marked favortism for anti-theists. In your case you are not likely tax-exempt as an anti-theist foundation, however I believe a case like this would bear civil impact and the person who brings suit would have a claim to relief.
Facts of the Case: Bob Jones University was dedicated to "fundamentalist Christian beliefs" which included prohibitions against interracial dating and marriage. Such behavior would lead to expulsion. In 1970, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) changed its formal policy to adopt a district court decision that prohibited the IRS from giving tax-exempt status to private schools engaging in racial discrimination. The IRS believed that the University's policies amounted to racism and revoked its tax-exempt status. The University claimed that the IRS had abridged its religious liberty. This case was decided together with Goldsboro Christian Schools Inc. v. United States, in which Goldsboro maintained a racially discriminatory admissions policy based upon its interpretation of the Bible, accepting for the most part only Caucasian students. The IRS determined that Goldsboro was not an exempt organization and hence was required to pay federal social security and unemployment taxes. After paying a portion of such taxes for certain years, Goldsboro filed a refund suit claiming that the denial of its tax-exempt status violated the U.S. Constitution.
Question: Can the government prohibit race discrimination at the expense of the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clauses?
Conclusion: The Court found that the IRS was correct in its decision to revoke the tax- exempt status of Bob Jones University and the Goldsboro Christian School. These institutions did not meet the requirement by providing "beneficial and stabilizing influences in community life" to be supported by taxpayers with a special tax status. The schools could not meet this requirement due to their discriminatory policies. The Court declared that racial discrimination in education violated a "fundamental national public policy." The government may justify a limitation on religious liberties by showing it is necessary to accomplish an "overriding governmental interest." Prohibiting racial discrimination was such a governmental interest. Hence, the Court found that "not all burdens on religion are unconstitutional."
Also, you might be interested in some boilerplate legalese regarding non-discrimination:
The [entity] shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, age, handicap, or national origin. The [entity] will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, age, handicap, or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to employment upgrading, promotion, demotion, termination, rates of pay, or other forms of compensation, and selection for training. The [entity] agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices summarizing the provisions of this equal opportunity clause. The [entity] shall, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by, or on behalf of the [entity] , state that it is an equal opportunity employer. The [entity] shall also comply with Presidential Executive Order 11246, “Equal Employment Opportunity,” as amended by Presidential Executive Order 11375, and as supplemented by 41 CFR Part 60.
As a rule of thumb, whenever it’s legal to state that you’re a Christian, it’s also legal to state that you’re an Atheist.
Declaring your anti-theist views is legally no different from declaring your anti-Islamic views as a Christian or your anti-Judaic views as a Muslim, etc. This is probably not the cleverest choice, regardless of legality.
There’s a fine line between saying “I am an atheist and hold a rational world view free of supernatural influences” and saying “all supernatural world views are wrong and their followers are deluded idiots”.
Unless it reflects the general practice in your industry, religion has no place in business concerns, so your company shouldn’t confess to any religious or non-religious views. If you want to discriminate against religious fundamentalists, you can’t legally do so on the basis of religion; you’ll have to find legally acceptable concerns to base your decisions on.
If you advertise your atheism without stating or implying that you would only do business with other atheists or that you would refuse to do business with someone based on their beliefs, then AFAIK you’re fine.
I’m not sure it’s a good idea from a business perspective, but legally I think you’d be okay. Frankly, I don’t think it’s a good idea for any company to explicitly advertise their beliefs as part of the company name or letterhead, because you’re going to immediately turn off potential customers.
I definitely wouldn’t try this in Lubbock, for example.
All content is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.